BTW, attached is some reasonable copy of the (pointed) Arabic text I
produced using the Apache XSL-FO processor (FOP), to which I have added
support for complex scripts. This example shows the same text in Lateef
(SIL), Scheherazade (SIL), Simplified Arabic (MSFT), and Traditional Arabic
(MSFT), respectively. The variation in output is not only a matter of glyph
complement, but also the presence and capabilities of the advanced
typographic tables provided by the font designer. In this case, FOP merely
applies those tables according to the font designer's choices as coded in
the OpenType GDEF, GSUB, and GPOS tables.
G.
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> Cameron,
>
> If you haven't already had this answered, yes it is correct that "the final
> form lam-alef ligature is allowed to look like its isolated
> cousin, just with the horizontal connecting bar to the right". This is a
> matter of font style and glyph design. Different font designers use
> different strategies in this regard.
>
> The Andalus font is an instance of the Koufi (or Kufic) style, while
> Dinwani Letter is an instance of the Diwani style. Both of these styles are
> used in current print, but typically serve for special purposes. That is,
> they are not typically used to write text for reading, but rather signs or
> ad copy.
>
> I would suggest using Simplified Arabic (MSFT) or perhaps Lateef
> or Scheherazade (SIL) for examples, which are all simplified forms of the
> popular Naskh style often used in Arabic copy.
>
> Regards,
> Glenn
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:
>
>> text-intro-06-t specifies font-family="Andalus,Diwani Letter,serif". To
>> my untrained eye, it seemed like Firefox was failing. The reference
>> image (which was generated with Andalus) looks pretty different from the
>> SVG rendering:
>>
>> http://mcc.id.au/temp/text-intro-06-rendering.png
>>
>> My knowledge of Arabic script is very slight, so I don’t know whether
>> the final form lam-alef ligature is allowed to look like its isolated
>> cousin, just with the horizontal connecting bar to the right, or if it
>> needs to be shaped like this one:
>>
>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/fefc/index.htm
>>
>> Diwani looks even more different.
>>
>> So I would like to change the test either to omit specific fonts, and
>> just use whatever the system chooses for Arabic text (likely to be a
>> more “normal” looking font than Andalus or Diwani) or to specify a
>> different (free) font, like Scheherazade, in TTF/WOFF.
>>
>> Let me know if you agree.
>>
>> --
>> Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
>>
>>
>